Steep Decline In Americans' Belief In Global Warming - Polidicks

I like to think that somewhere between, "THE EARTH IN 2020 WILL BE JUST LIKE WATERWORLD," and "IT'S ALARMIST LIBERAL COMMIE PROPAGANDA," the truth lies.

[QUOTE=john_pelphre;17990612][url]http://joannenova.com.au/2009/04/global-warming-a-classic-case-of-alarmism/[/url] [img]http://joannenova.com.au//globalwarming/graphs/akasofu/akasofu_graph_little_ice-age.gif[/img][/QUOTE] Sure, it's warming, but this doesn't tell us what is causing it. [editline]01:01PM[/editline] If it's a natural process we aren't going to be able to stop it. [editline]01:03PM[/editline] [QUOTE=TH89;17989644]I don't think you're understanding your web page you keep linking. Climate modeling DOES include water vapor. Your web page says "Interestingly, many "facts and figures' regarding global warming completely ignore the powerful effects of water vapor in the greenhouse system, carelessly (perhaps, deliberately) overstating human impacts as much as 20-fold." There's no indication that they're referring to anything other than propaganda literature, and to assume otherwise would be pretty stupid. They're not. The panel had less than 20 people on it, if I recall correctly. But tens of thousands of climatologists support their conclusions. And incidentally, the UN panel was formed with the express goal of cutting through the bullshit and figuring out exactly how much of a threat there is, in order to keep member nations from wasting resources unnecessarily. If anything, "it's not a big deal" was what the UN wanted to hear. Unless you're a conspiracy theorist who thinks the UN is trying to take over the world but that's neither here nor there. [editline]05:12PM[/editline] If you want to go that route, it's a lot MORE beneficial to the oil and auto industries to have it discredited, and a disproportionate number of global warming deniers' salaries are funded by oil interests, including Mr. Penn's friends from the CATO institute. But it usually is. Now you're using creationist logic.[/QUOTE] 1) You don't get it. Not only is our impact on the environment exaggerated, but the given percentages of human CO2 don't match up with the increases in temperature. 2)If it's only twenty people then it'd be very easy for a conspiracy to form. 3)Sure it is, but oil is going to be a demanded commodity until the wells run dry. They have nothing to really worry about. 4)Not creationist at all. It's skepticism. Always try to disprove what is the convention.

[QUOTE=TH89;17970776]I'm not saying they were intentionally trying to lie to people. I hope they're not (although who can tell, in the entertainment industry). But they obviously stacked the deck in favor of the side they wanted to look good, [B]despite their protestations of neutrality.[/B] You can't ACCIDENTALLY not have any climate scientists on a show where you're talking about climate science. I mean, they pitted professional political speakers against idiot kids ffs. Pretty Moore-esque in approach, and about as disingenuous.[/QUOTE] They do mention that they are 'Biased as all fuck'.

lol "belief" of global warming. Some things cannot be fake. you can "believe" in something like Santa, or God, but not something SCIENCE has proven. So if you don't believe in global warming, you don't believe in Science. If you don't believe in Science, stop using a computer, which Science created! My momma said Science is the Devil!

Honestly, I am not really convinced that global warming is a huge threat to the survival of humanity, but I don't generally challenge the idea. Anything that motivates people to switch from oil to a more sustainable source of energy is a good thing for "I don't want to die in a horrible Malthusian catastrophe" reasons.

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;17990646]I like to think that somewhere between, "THE EARTH IN 2020 WILL BE JUST LIKE WATERWORLD," and "IT'S ALARMIST LIBERAL COMMIE PROPAGANDA," the truth lies.[/QUOTE] The former is based on a misinterpretation of Al's presentation, when he said "if X melts, here's the change globally". That was combined with a timetable for what the water level rise would be by 2020, and of course then it looks very silly.

[QUOTE=Mr. Mcguffin;17992840]The former is based on a misinterpretation of Al's presentation, when he said "if X melts, here's the change globally". That was combined with a timetable for what the water level rise would be by 2020, and of course then it looks very silly.[/QUOTE] I actually picked a random date that seemed unreasonably close for the world become a Kevin Costner film but okay. Sounds good.

[QUOTE=RayK;17990738]Sure, it's warming, but this doesn't tell us what is causing it. [editline]01:01PM[/editline] If it's a natural process we aren't going to be able to stop it. [editline]01:03PM[/editline] 1) You don't get it. Not only is our impact on the environment exaggerated, but the given percentages of human CO2 don't match up with the increases in temperature. 2)If it's only twenty people then it'd be very easy for a conspiracy to form. 3)Sure it is, but oil is going to be a demanded commodity until the wells run dry. They have nothing to really worry about. 4)Not creationist at all. It's skepticism. Always try to disprove what is the convention.[/QUOTE] 1) Would you mind showing the figures for that? 2) Not if their findings were being scrutinized by hundreds of independent sources. Then it would be a very hard conspiracy to maintain. 3) Except for the government stepping in on their business with restrictions and other things they'd rather not deal with. Anything that makes them make less profit is something they'd rather not have. So unless the oil companies are sharing profits with the bottled water industry, I think there would be a problem there. Which there is. 4) So you're saying you've recently been studying climatology in a bid to scrutinize global warming? And on another note, I'd like to know where you got that solar irradiance graph from. [editline]07:06PM[/editline] [QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;17992933]I actually picked a random date that seemed unreasonably close for the world become a Kevin Costner film but okay. Sounds good.[/QUOTE] You must be attuned to the greater conservative consciousness.

[QUOTE=Mr. Mcguffin;17992944]You must be attuned to the greater conservative consciousness.[/QUOTE] C-consciousness, as we call it. STRELOOOK!

[QUOTE=john_pelphre;17990612][url]http://joannenova.com.au/2009/04/global-warming-a-classic-case-of-alarmism/[/url] [img]http://joannenova.com.au//globalwarming/graphs/akasofu/akasofu_graph_little_ice-age.gif[/img][/QUOTE] I lol'd at the chart. Earth has been estimated to have been here about 4.5 billion years(?) and we only have 200 years of recording the climate data. Even then if you look at the chart. The first 80 years was estimating. Scientists know how much greenhouse gases we are putting into the atmosphere per year, but they don't know how much was there in the first place. Scientists are still unsure as to whether Global Warming is a natural occurance or unnatural (Being caused by us). As for global warming however, it exists, most defiantly. But there are wayyyy too many plausible causes to be pointing fingers. Here's an article, read it and you will know another theory. [url]http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=5164[/url]

[QUOTE=darkedone02;17985151]I believe in the theory of evolution, however i don't believe in this [b]freakin[/b] scam you call "climate change" that made by Al Gore himself who made a video of it... and if you look at his electricity bill you see the scam.[/QUOTE] freakin holy crap lois

[QUOTE=RayK;17990738]1) You don't get it. Not only is our impact on the environment exaggerated, but the given percentages of human CO2 don't match up with the increases in temperature.[/QUOTE] According to you and your webpage. According to thousands of climatologists, you're both wrong. With all due respect, I'm thinking their opinions hold more than yours, even on an individual basis. [QUOTE=RayK;17990738]2)If it's only twenty people then it'd be very easy for a conspiracy to form.[/QUOTE] Too bad it's thousands, then, right? [QUOTE=RayK;17990738]3)Sure it is, but oil is going to be a demanded commodity until the wells run dry. They have nothing to really worry about.[/QUOTE] Then why are they funding global warming deniers? [QUOTE=RayK;17990738]4)Not creationist at all. It's skepticism. Always try to disprove what is the convention.[/QUOTE] The purpose of skepticism isn't to disprove a theory, it's to test its strength. The fact that nobody has come up with any holes big enough to convince any significant number of climatologists is telling evidence that the theory is in fact sound. The difference between skepticism and denial is rationality. You're not being rational.

hurf durf testing strength means you're trying to break it faggot. you're so fucking unreasonable i'm not even going to argue it anymore. also I just read this today [quote=msn.com]But areas of the high-end children's market continue to thrive. What's hot: virtuous spending on Junior. "Green is the new black," observes Field, pointing to the huge number of manufacturers and retailers who have turned to environmentalism to keep the red ink at bay.[/quote] [url]http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/SavingandDebt/LearnToBudget/kiddie-luxe-is-still-alive-and-well.aspx[/url] trust me the numbers say that there is something bigger going on than the industrial revolution. earth has been through these periods before any mammals were even inhabiting the earth. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - TH89))[/highlight]

I was wondering, what's your education?

Since Global Warming (sorry, Climate Change now that it's getting colder again) is now a religion, I'm sure the EU will ban anyone from debating it since someone might take offense. Therefore the debate is over or something. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Threadshitting" - TH89))[/highlight]

why HELLO I AM A LAYMAN POSTING ON THE INTERNET ABOUT SCIENCE I AM IN NO WAY QUALIFIED TO HOLD THE OPINIONS I HOLD BUT BOY DO I HOLD THEM. you guys are scrubs how difficult is this to get: ya if you look at the last 100,000 years you see a fuckload of fluctuations in climate no one is disagreeing with this. ya the planet getting hotter could be entirely natural WHAT SCIENCE IS WORRIED ABOUT IS MAN'S ADDITIONAL EFFECT ON AN ALREADY NATURAL PROCESS HOW COMPLICATED IS THIS TO UNDERSTAND. A NEW, CONTROLLABLE FACTOR IN THE CLIMATE OF THE PLANET HAS BEEN INTRODUCED AND MAYBE IT WONT HAVE AN EFFECT NOW BUT 100, 200, 300 YEARS FROM NOW YEP ITS PROBABLY GONNA. NOBODY THINKS CARBON EMISSIONS ARE GONNA FUCKIN SINK THE WORLD ONLY RETARDS. jesus christ you are all stupid unless you agree with me then rock on

Firerain has more common sense than some of the people arguing here ^_^ Seriously, there are so many variables to factor in to this, I doubt any scientist or group of scientist really has definitive proof on anything. Ozone Layer - Nobody has been talking about this for a while, since around the time Global Warming became the new hot topic. Our affect on the ozone layer has allowed more radiation from the sun to hit the earth, which probably has some affect on climate. Deforestation - Again, this hasn't been much of a topic for discussion lately. Less tress = less CO2 turning into O2, again probably having some affect on climate. Aliens - are using mirrors to direct more sunlight to our planet. For reals, y'all. Lots of other shit we have been doing to the planet - basically I don't even remember all the shit I see on the Discovery Channel, so rate me box. Are we eventually going to kill the planet? Well fuck yes! This is America, bitches, and we don't fuck shit up on a small scale! I mean, we humans don't fuck shit up on a small scale :D Global Warming is probably not going to be what kills us. Gay marriage, abortion, and more sequels to shitty movies are going to kill us.

[QUOTE=Firerain;18010170]why HELLO I AM A LAYMAN POSTING ON THE INTERNET ABOUT SCIENCE I AM IN NO WAY QUALIFIED TO HOLD THE OPINIONS I HOLD BUT BOY DO I HOLD THEM. you guys are scrubs how difficult is this to get: ya if you look at the last 100,000 years you see a fuckload of fluctuations in climate no one is disagreeing with this. ya the planet getting hotter could be entirely natural WHAT SCIENCE IS WORRIED ABOUT IS MAN'S ADDITIONAL EFFECT ON AN ALREADY NATURAL PROCESS HOW COMPLICATED IS THIS TO UNDERSTAND. A NEW, CONTROLLABLE FACTOR IN THE CLIMATE OF THE PLANET HAS BEEN INTRODUCED AND MAYBE IT WONT HAVE AN EFFECT NOW BUT 100, 200, 300 YEARS FROM NOW YEP ITS PROBABLY GONNA. NOBODY THINKS CARBON EMISSIONS ARE GONNA FUCKIN SINK THE WORLD ONLY RETARDS. jesus christ you are all stupid unless you agree with me then rock on[/QUOTE] ah shit he's back

[QUOTE=sp00ks;18008385]I was wondering, what's your education?[/QUOTE] wikipedia.

The world is warming up, but probably not from humans.

[QUOTE=Upgrade123;18016890]The world is warming up, but probably not from humans.[/QUOTE] No, it's from humans.

[QUOTE=Upgrade123;18016890]The world is warming up, but probably not from humans.[/QUOTE] You sir, are wrong. New evidence for human induced climate change is churned out almost weekly.

[QUOTE=petieng;18017251]You sir, are wrong. New evidence for human induced climate change is churned out almost weekly.[/QUOTE] Yes but they don't see it because it is published in Science Journals, which are not as fun as Penn & Teller and South Park

hey bro i'm pretty sure the makers of south park "believe" global warming is true